Re: [RFC] Document level property drawer

From:

Marco Wahl

Subject:

Re: [RFC] Document level property drawer

Date:

Mon, 13 Jan 2020 22:52:11 +0100

User-agent:

Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13)

Sebastian Miele <address@hidden> writes:
> But for such properties to satisfactorily work for me, they would have
> to be visible by default. E.g. I would want the header-args to be
> immediately visible just like they are when they are written after
> #+BEGIN_SRC or #+HEADER. Otherwise I would find myself constantly
> wondering whether this or that property drawer contains something
> essential and every TAB on a collapsed headline would have be followed
> by an accompanying move to the property drawer and a TAB there.
>
> On the other hand, there are properties that are very good candidates
> for remaining hidden by default, like ID.
>
> I would like to be able to make a clear distinction between properties
> that are visible by default and properties that are not. Maybe it would
> be possible to allow some #+.. syntax following headings for subtree
> properties that are visible by default. A requirement could be made that
> such property specifications always have to be followed by a property
> drawer, even if that is empty. Then everything #+.. that is before the
> property drawer would belong to the heading/subtree, and everything #+..
> that follows the drawer would be treated as it is until now.
>
> Please tell me if I missed something and Org is already capable of
> something like that. If not, are there others who would like
> visible-by-default property specifications for headings/subtrees in
> addition to invisible-by-default property specifications in drawers,
> too?
I don't think Org is capable of this out of the box right now. Further
I don't feel the need for a visible-by-default property, but that's just
me.
> Finally, I would like to state an opinion: If there is
> visible-by-default (by #+..) and invisible-by-default (by drawers)
> syntax for headings/subtrees, including level 0, it may be viable to
> require them to be disjoint for each heading/subtree. Most probably it
> would be good practice, anyway. And the precedence question raised
> previously in this thread would be eliminated.
I may not feel the need for the visible/invisible-by-default properties
but actually I like the idea of #+ properties parallel to the property
drawers as visible by default properties. But since the #+ properties
may appear anywhere in the Org file and affect the whole file it would
be difficult or even impossible to give them reliable meaning for
subtrees AFAICS.
My 2ct,
--
Marco